Roleplaying being a good leader or a bad leader is what I'm talking about to make it that much more understandable for you.Wait... "they get chocobos for free.. but just have to pay higher taxes". So in other words... they're still paying for chocobos, just indirectly. Brilliant! Keep 'em coming, Dyne... You're really hitting it outta the park with these well thought-out concepts to support your idea.
OH... So now it's really all about Role Playing.
Funny, for the past several pages, it's been all about being ruler of a region and all the perks that power brings with it. All the ways you can influence other people's gameplay.
Someone calls out the problems your previous sales-pitch could bring, so - on a dime - it now becomes "all about Role Playing".
It's amazing watching you jump from one foot to the other, morphing and changing the idea from one thing to another based on who you're replying to.
No, it makes it clear that you have no clear idea of exactly what the system is, what kind of experience it's aimed at or how it would actually fit into the game's setting.
It makes it clear that you are willing to change your perspective, and how you pitch the idea, to suit who ever you happen to be responding to. For one person it's a BLT on Rye, for another it's a Ham Sandwich, for yet another it's a Hot Dog. Reading through all your posts in support of it for the last 7 pages or so, there is no consistency in how you're explaining the system. It changes almost from one post to the next.
It makes it clear that you have put no thought into the system, how it would play out or how players would affect or be affected by it.
It makes it clear that your thought process goes only so far as "I want to be able to rule a city and control stuff" and everything after that is "fluff that someone else can figure out.
Perhaps if you took more time to think the idea through, think of the ramifications, how it would fit into the gameworld, what abuses might be opened up by such a system, how it would affect how people experience the rest of the game... not to mention elements of the game that aren't even in the game yet or things SE has planned that we don't even know about yet... Perhaps if you set out a defined and consistent set of rules, restrictions and benefits that didn't change depending on who you were talking to and what their objection was... perhaps then your pet idea could be taken a bit more seriously and warrant serious discussion.
Instead of just calling me "Lazy" why don't you come up with your own ideas instead on crapping on everyone elses.No, it makes it clear that you have no clear idea of exactly what the system is, what kind of experience it's aimed at or how it would actually fit into the game's setting.
It makes it clear that you are willing to change your perspective, and how you pitch the idea, to suit who ever you happen to be responding to. For one person it's a BLT on Rye, for another it's a Ham Sandwich, for yet another it's a Hot Dog. Reading through all your posts in support of it for the last 7 pages or so, there is no consistency in how you're explaining the system. It changes almost from one post to the next.
It makes it clear that you have put no thought into the system, how it would play out or how players would affect or be affected by it.
It makes it clear that your thought process goes only so far as "I want to be able to rule a city and control stuff" and everything after that is "fluff that someone else can figure out.
Perhaps if you took more time to think the idea through, think of the ramifications, how it would fit into the gameworld, what abuses might be opened up by such a system, how it would affect how people experience the rest of the game... not to mention elements of the game that aren't even in the game yet or things SE has planned that we don't even know about yet... Perhaps if you set out a defined and consistent set of rules, restrictions and benefits that didn't change depending on who you were talking to and what their objection was... perhaps then your pet idea could be taken a bit more seriously and warrant serious discussion.
I know I'm not the person you were replying to, but I did post an elaboration here.
Perhaps instead of slinging mud at each we could actually discuss the topic at hand?![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.